Guest dada_rocks Posted June 18, 2008 Posted June 18, 2008 Two issues that are pivotal in India/US relationship are Nuclear deal and agriculture subsidiy. On both fronts obama is inimical to India's interest. While on nuclear deal he is patronising at best and in opposititon at worst on agriculture subsidy hehas no stance that means perpetuation of status quo. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Columnists/Swaminathan_A_Aiyar/Swaminomics/India_needs_McCain_as_US_President/articleshow/2986947.cms Some blatant lies he peddled in his campaign in cohort with subservient media awed by his glib-talk Partial List Of Obama Campaign Lies 67 Lies And Counting As Of April 02, 2008 http://www.rense.com/general82/part.htm RENSE.COM, June 03, 2008 Barack Obama 1.) Selma Got Me Born - LIAR, your parents felt safe enough to have you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965. 2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - LIAR, he was a privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government. 3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - LIAR, he was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had. 4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - LIAR, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first widespread violence in decades. 5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - LIAR, she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn't allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man. 6.) My Name is African Swahili - LIAR, your name is Arabic and 'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means 'blessed' in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama. 7.) I Never Practiced Islam - LIAR, you practiced it daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31 years,until your wife made you change, so you could run for office. 8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - LIAR, you were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces (check your own book). 9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - LIAR, not one teacher says you could speak the language. 10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign Experience - LIAR, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn't even speak the language. What did you learn, how to study the Koran and watch cartoons. 11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - LIAR, except for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have never been anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience with our closest allies. 12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - LIAR, you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you were just fine. 13.) An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - LIAR, Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist. 14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - LIAR, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never did, exist. 15.) I Won't Run On A National Ticket In '08 - LIAR, here you are, despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first. 16.) "Present" Votes Are Common In Illinois - LIAR, they are common for YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES. 17.) Oops, I Misvoted - LIAR, only when caught by church groups and democrats, did you beg to change your misvote. 18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - LIAR, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE. 19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - LIAR, you were a senior lecturer ON LEAVE. 20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - LIAR, you didn't write it,introduce it, change it, or create it. 21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - LIAR, it took just 14 days from start to finish. 22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - LIAR, your bill was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly because of your Nuclear Donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came. 23.) I Have Released My State Records - LIAR, as of March, 2008, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within. 24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - LIAR, you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your books. 25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - LIAR, your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill. 26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - LIAR, even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part. 27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - LIAR, they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office. 28.) No One Contacted Canada About NAFTA - LIAR, the Candian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your campaign had with them. 29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - LIAR, you missed the Iran Resolution vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali Abunimah supports the destruction of Israel. 30.) I Am Not Acting As President Yet - LIAR, after the NAFTA Memo, a dead terrorist in the FARC, in Colombia, was found with a letter stating how you and he were working together on getting FARC recognized officially. 31.) I Didn't Run Ads In Florida - LIAR, you allowed national ads to run 8-12 times per day for two weeks - and you still lost. 32.) I Won Michigan - LIAR, no you didn't. 33.) I won Nevada - LIAR, no you did not. 34.) I Want All Votes To Count - LIAR, you said let the delegates decide. 35.) I Want Americans To Decide - LIAR, you prefer caucuses that limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate during small windows of time. 36.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - LIAR, you passed 26, most of which you didn't write yourself. 37.) My Campaign Was Extorted By A Friend - LIAR, that friend is threatening to sue if you do not stop saying this. Obama has stopped saying this. 38.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - LIAR, you used tactics to eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you. 39.) I Don't Take PAC Money - LIAR, you take loads of it. 40.) I don't Have Lobbysists - LIAR, you have over 47 lobbyists, and counting. 41.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - LIAR, your own campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon. 42.) My Campaign Never Took Over MySpace - LIAR, Tom, who started MySpace issued a warning about this advertising to MySpace clients. 43.) I Inspire People With My Words - LIAR, you inspire people with other people's words. 44.) I Have Passed Bills In The U.S. Senate - LIAR, you have passed A BILL in the U.S. Senate - for Africa, which shows YOUR priorities. 45.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - LIAR, you weren't in office to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time, unlike Kucinich, who seems to be out gutting you Obama. You also seem to be stepping back from your departure date - AGAIN. 46.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - LIAR, your plan leaves us all to pay the 15,000,000 who don't have to buy it. 47.) I Only Found Out About My Investment Conflicts Via Mail - LIAR, both companies you site as having sent you letters about this conflict have no record of any such letter ever being created or sent. 48.) I Am As Patriotic As Anyone - LIAR, you won't wear a flag pin and you don't put your hand over your heart during the Anthem. 49.) My Wife Didn't Mean What She Said About Pride In Country - LIAR, your wife's words follow lock-step in the vein of Wright and Farrahkan, in relation to their contempt and hatred of America. 50.) Wal-Mart Is A Company I Wouldn't Support - LIAR, your wife has received nearly a quater of a million dollars through Treehouse, which is connected to Wal-Mart. 51.) Treehouse Is A Small Company - LIAR, the CEO of Treehouse last year, made more than the CEO of Wal-Mart, according to public records. 52.) University Of Chicago Hospital Pay Is Fair - LIAR, your wife's pay raise was nearly 150% her already bloated rate and the hospital is a Non-Profit Hospital, which made $100,000,000 in the last 3 years. They overcharge blacks VS whites for services, and overcharge everyone in general by 538%! 53.) I Barely Know Rezko - Only 5 Billed Hours - LIAR, you have known him for 17 years, and decided to do a real estate deal with him during a time when he was proven to be under investigation. Despite this, you divided your property and had them take off $300K before the mortgage problems started. Then Rezko's wife buys the lot beside it that you can't afford, saving you $625,000. 54.) My Donations Have Been Checked Thoroughly - LIAR, you only gave back Hsu ($72K) and Rezko (first $66K, then when caught lying $86K, then when caught lying again $150K and now caught lying YET AGAIN OBAMA, it's $250k) their money when publicly called on their involvement in your campaigns. 55.) My Church Is Like Any Other Christian Church - LIAR, your church is so extreme, the pastor who married you, Rev. Wright, just got done blaming the US for 9/11 and named Louis Farrahkan their person of the year. 56.) I Disagree With My Church All The Time - LIAR, you still have yet to repudiate Wright, who married you and your wife, and you still donate large sums of money to assist the church in furthering its message - hatred and revenge. You donated in 2006 alone, $22,500 to the church that you so terribly disagree with. That is nearly $500 PER WEEK - that sure is disagreement, Senator Obama. 57.) I Have Clean Connections Despite Rezko - LIAR, you are not only connected to Exelon and Rezko, you are also connected to Hillary PAC supporter Mr. Hsu, AND an Iraqi Billionaire of ill repute, Nadhmi Auchi, who ripped off people in the Food For Oil, Iraqi deal. Seems Mr. Auchi may have helped Obama buy his million dollar property long before Obama had millions of dollars. Wonder what favors Mr. Auchi expects, when Obama leaves Iraq free to be taken over by special interests such as him. 58.) I never heard sermons like Rev. Wright's, that have been in videos all day, You Tube - LIAR! 3 days later during your Mea Culpa BS speech you said "Did I hear controversial statements while I sat in that church? Yes I did." 59.) The Passport Invasion is a conspiracy to find dirt on me! - LIAR. Your own Campaign Foreign Policy Advisor is the CEO of the company that looked into your records. PS - You had them look into yours to hide the fact you looked into Clinton's and McCain's more than a year before! 60.) Rev. Meeks has nothing to do with my campaigning - LIAR. Rev. Meeks appeared in ads for your Senate Campaign, donated to you, and helped raise money, then AND NOW. PS - He also seems to despise America. 61.) My wife didn't mean America is ignorant, she was just using a phrase - LIAR. Again, Michelle's comments perfectly sync with Wright's, Meeks', and Farrakhans, both in language, anger, and direction. 62.) I am very Anti-Terror - LIAR. [03/30/2008] One of your good pals is long time radical and terrorist William Ayers, with whom you have been seen in the last 12 months and who has helped the now jailed khalidi, Professor at Columbia who invited Ahmadinejad to the University, to raise money for Palestinian terrorism attacks against Israel. PS - Your church published a pro Hamas Manifesto - guess you weren't there on THAT Sunday either? How lucky for you. 63.) I have the best plan to cure the Mortgage Crisis - LIAR. [03/30/2008] You and your campaign buddy Penny SubPrime Bank Collapse Prizker have had your little fingers full of subprime cash - Obama has taken $1,180,103 from the top issuers of subprime loans: Obama received $266,907 from Lehman, $5395 from GMAC, $150,850 from Credit Suisse First Boston, $11,250 from Countrywide, $9052 from Washington Mutual, $161,850 from Citigroup, $4600 from CBASS, $170,050 from Morgan Stanley, $1150 from Centex, and last but certainly NOT LEAST - Obama received $351,900 from Goldman Sachs. I am sure that cash all came from folks who knew the subprime loan they had was a dream, eh? 64) I played greater role in crafting liberal stands on gun control, the death penalty and abortion - LIAR - [03/31/2008] It was found that Obama - the day after sitting for the interview - filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama's own handwritten notes added to one answer. Read Obama had greater role on liberal survey. 65) I did NOT play the race card: - LIAR - [03/31/2008] Obama was the first to play the race card. According to Philadelphia Inquirer, Quietly, the storm over the hateful views expressed by Sen. Barack Obama's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, has blown away the most insidious myth of the Democratic primary campaign. Obama and his surrogates have charged that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has deliberately and cleverly played the race card in order to label Obama the "black" candidate. Read more here 66) I did not take money from oil companies: - LIAR - [03/31/2008] THE FACTS: True enough, Obama does not take money from oil companies. No candidate does. It is illegal for corporations to give money to politicians. Corporations, however, do have political action committees that collect voluntary donations from employees and then donate them to candidates. Obama doesn't take money from PACs. He also doesn't take money from lobbyists. But he does accept money from executives and other employees of oil companies and two of his fundraiser's are oil company executives. As of Feb. 29, Obama's presidential campaign had received nearly $214,000 from oil and gas industry employees and their families, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Clinton had received nearly $307,000 from industry workers and their families and Republican Sen. John McCain, the likely GOP presidential nominee, received nearly $394,000, according to the center's totals. Two of Obama's fundraisers are Robert Cavnar, the chairman and chief executive of Houston-based Mission Resources Corp., and George Kaiser, the president and CEO of Tulsa-based Kaiser-Francis Oil Co. Source: Associated press via Yahoo News 67) "I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial," Obama said at a community meeting in Nelsonville, Ohio, earlier this month. - LIAR - But yesterday, he told a different story. "Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes," he said in his speech yesterday in Philadelphia. UPDATE: Unable to defend his continuing membership in his church in view of its pastor and most recently a guest pastor's preaching, Obama announced his resignation from the church 5/31/08. But notice his statement: "I'm not denouncing the church and I'm not interested in people who want me to denoucne the church", adding that the new pastor at Trinity and the "the church have been suffereng from the attention my campaign has focused on them". He will not denounce what was preached, but only that his campaign is calling attention to the message spewed out from the church. Quite a different thing from disagreeing with what the pastors said. (Quotes re: church resignation from Associated Press, San Jose Mercury 5/31/08)
NeoCon Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Obama is a traitor to the US and a complete idiot, just like every other Liberals. Glory to McCain!
Guest dada_rocks Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Obama is a traitor to the US and a complete idiot' date=' just like every other Liberals. Glory to McCain![/quote'] Come on dude no idiot goes that far starting from zero.. do u possess traitor-meter:--D
sandtest Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Interesting find DR....since you guyz are in Uttari Amreeka, I was always curious to know as who could be good for raising India's interests. It seems Obama is a clever speaker, but I caught his views pertaining to India specific Nuclear deal and safegaurds, they are not encouraging. I hope this guy is not surrounded by Stephen "Paki" Cohen or Medinine Halfbright kind of subtle India hating diplomats. here's a long but interesting anaysis from Brahma Chellanney -- Obama’s India-nuke legacy Brahma Chellaney Barack Obama’s epochal political breakthrough in becoming the first black presidential candidate in history of either of the two main US political parties is a tribute to his stump skills and the popular hopes he inspires. In contrast to his ageing opponent John McCain, whose conservatism is anchored in the past, the 46-year-old Obama is the candidate for change, offering a distinctly different vision centred on charting a better future. That is Obama’s real strength. A first-term US senator, Obama has come up rapidly. But even as a rookie Senator, Obama left a distinct imprint in congressional deliberations. Take the US-Indian nuclear deal. The deal is currently in limbo. But if it ever takes effect, Obama’s contribution would have been no small in the constraints the US Congress has imposed on civil nuclear cooperation with India. When the full Senate considered the deal, Obama criticised what he called the "blank cheque" offered to India through the official waiver legislation introduced by the Bush administration in March 2006. Obama’s intervention is recorded in Congressional Record of November 16, 2006: "Mr President, I rise today to express my support for the US-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act. I believe strengthening the relationship between our two nations is an important strategic goal and this legislation helps us take a dramatic step in this direction. "However, I have concerns with potential non-proliferation consequences of this agreement. Much to my disappointment, the administration has done very little to address these concerns, instead, sending draft legislation to the Congress that was essentially a blank cheque. "The managers of the Bill, Senators Lugar and Biden, have done a tremendous job taking the administration’s proposal and shaping it into meaningful, bipartisan legislation. The Bill now before the Senate helps move us closer to India while addressing some key non-proliferation issues. "However, I remain concerned about the issue of nuclear testing. A decision by the Indian government to conduct such a test could trigger an arms race in South Asia that would be extremely dangerous and destabilising. "The good news is that the joint statement between President Bush and Prime Minister Singh of July 18, 2005, declared that India’s unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing will continue. I take Prime Minister Singh at his word, but also believe in following President Reagan’s mantra of ‘trust but verify’." Obama was not content that the official Bill actually attached a legally binding rider to the deal tantamount to dragging India through the backdoor into the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. While the CTBT grants its parties the right to withdraw by invoking supreme national interest, the official Bill put India under a permanent test ban by mandating re-imposition of civil nuclear sanctions in the event of a test. To help further toughen the legislation, Obama introduced two amendments that reshaped the terms on which India is now being offered the deal. The first amendment was an insertion that imposed fetters on India’s access to fuel, restricting such imports to "reasonable reactor operating requirements." Obama’s amendment not only undercut the stated raison d’être of the original deal — "full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India" — but also busted Dr Manmohan Singh’s assurance to Parliament that New Delhi would secure the right to build lifetime fuel stocks to guard against supply disruption. Obama’s Senate Amendment 5169, passed by a voice vote, stated: "It is the policy of the United States that any nuclear power reactor fuel reserve provided to the government of India for use in safeguarded civilian nuclear facilities should be commensurate with reasonable reactor operating requirements." His amendment, which became Section 114 of the Senate Bill, found its way into the final legislation as Section 103 (b) (10) of the Hyde Act. The amendment’s avowed purpose was to "clarify US policy in order to deter nuclear testing." Consider the following exchange in the Senate: Obama: On a related note, is it the chairman’s interpretation of the legislation that, in the event of a future nuclear test by the government of India, nuclear power reactor fuel and equipment sales, and nuclear technology cooperation would terminate; other elements of the US-India nuclear agreement would likely terminate; and the US would have the right to demand the return of nuclear supplies? Lugar: Yes, under our Bill, the only requirement which is waived is that in Section 123.a(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 — for full-scope safeguards. India’s 123 Agreement would still have to meet the requirement of Section 123.a(4), (Just goes to shows that 123 has to be in sync with the domestic laws as stated in article2(1) of 123: "Each Party shall implement this Agreement in accordance with its respective applicable treaties, national laws, regulations, and license requirements concerning the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.") which requires that in the event of a test by India of a nuclear-explosive device, the US shall have the right to request the return of supplies as you have stipulated. Obama: I offered an amendment that the managers have already accepted pertaining to the supply of nuclear power reactor fuel in safeguarded civilian nuclear facilities. To further clarify this issue, is it the managers’ understanding that provision of fuel to the government of India should be sized in a way to maintain a deterrent to Indian nuclear testing, while also providing protections against short-term fluctuations in the supply of nuclear fuel? In other words, is it your understanding that providing a fuel reserve to India is not intended to facilitate resum-ption in nuclear testing? Lugar: Yes, that is our understanding. Obama: Does the chairman believe that, as this agreement moves forward to the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group, the US should work to ensure that other nations provide nuclear power reactor fuel in a similar fashion? Lugar: Yes, I hope that would be the case. (i.e. commensurate with reasonable reactor operating requirements and not for lifetime of fuel supply) The "deterrent against Indian testing" Obama sought by keeping India on a tight fuel-access leash is a goal embraced by the full Congress in passing the Hyde Act. According to the Act’s accompanying explanatory statement, the fuel reserve provided to New Delhi should not be "of a size that would enable India to break its commitments, or end its moratorium on nuclear testing, and [still] maintain its civil nuclear energy production despite unilateral or international sanctions." It also records that US officials, contradicting Dr Singh’s lifetime-fuel claim in Parliament, had testified that America "does not intend to help India build a stockpile of nuclear fuel for the purpose of riding out any sanctions that might be imposed in response to Indian actions such as conducting a nuclear test." To further crimp India’s fuel access, the Obama-authored stipulation allowing imports for only reasonable operating needs is coupled with the requirements of Hyde Act’s Section 104 (g) (2) (H) and Section 104 (g) (2) (J) that the President annually estimate the amount of uranium mined in India during the previous year and let Congress know whether the imported uranium had affected India’s rate of production of unsafeguarded fissile material. Obama’s desire that any exemption for India from the rules of the 45-nation NSG similarly restrict Indian access to foreign fuel will be easy to realise, given that Washington has considerable leverage over the international firms that monopolise the reactor fuel business. To help maintain a tab on India’s nuclear activities, the Senate Bill’s Section 108 (a) stipulated that Congress be kept fully informed on India’s: (i) material non-compliance with any obligation; (ii) new nuclear facility construction; (iii) fissile-material production; and (iv) changes in the operational status of nuclear installations. That provision became the Hyde Act’s Section 104 (g) (1). Obama helped insert another amendment to ensure that America did not facilitate civil nuclear exports to India by other states, if US exports to New Delhi were terminated. This effectively nullified Dr Singh’s commitment to Parliament that if fuel shipments were suspended, "the US and India would jointly convene a group of friendly supplier countries … to pursue such measures as would restore fuel supply to India." His amendment became Section 102 (6) in the Senate Bill and was incorporated in the Hyde Act as Section 102 (13). To ensure that no firm in another NSG country exported to India on less-stringent terms, the Hyde Act’s Section 104 (g) (2) © is identical to the Senate Bill’s Section 108 (b) (3) in mandating that the President’s cyclic "Implementation and Compliance Report" to Congress provide a description of any significant commerce between India and other countries that either was inconsistent with NSG guidelines or would not meet standards applicable to US-origin material. The intent behind this provision is to use the threat of sanctions to block a proposed export by, say, a French or Russian firm on less-rigorous terms. The point here is that Obama’s call for an effective "deterrent" against Indian testing is fully reflected in the final legislation. Also, as he desired, the legislation covers US policy and actions in the NSG. Yet, despite this background, Dr Singh still pitches for the deal. And although a permanent test ban is built into the deal, a despairing Dr Singh recently made a curious policy pronouncement: "if the CTBT came into being, we will not sign it." That inexplicably reversed India’s stance that it won’t come in the way of the CTBT’s entry into force. Whether Obama becomes President or not, his legacy helps constrict India’s access and options under the deal. Indeed, that legacy exposes a few myths: l The deal offers to resolve India’s self-made uranium crunch by opening the path to unfettered access to foreign fuel; l Unlike the US waiver, the NSG will grant India a "clean" exemption; and l Once the deal with the US takes effect, New Delhi would gain access to civil nuclear items and materials from France and Russia on more-favourable political terms. l Soaring oil prices justify greater emphasis on nuclear power. There is little link between oil and nuclear energy, because oil is primarily used for transportation and the nuclear choice is for electricity generation. Indeed, such myths show that if the deal traverses to the next stages, India will be in for nasty surprises. But it is already clear that this deal cannot become a reality while George W. Bush is still President. For example, to win congressional ratification, the agreement has to be submitted to Congress "for a period of 60 days of continuous session" before a joint resolution for approval can be taken up for consideration by the two legislative chambers. And despite the provision for a simple up-or-down vote the Hyde Act states that it will open to Congress to "pass a joint resolution of approval with conditions" by giving up the available "expedited procedures." The blunt fact is that it will be an Obama or McCain administration — and a new government in New Delhi — that will have the final say on the deal. The cheerleaders of the deal who have been shouting themselves hoarse thus need to hold their fire. An Obama triumph — good for America and good for the world — will help add momentum to the US-India relationship by freeing it of the albatross that the deal now represents http://www.asianage.com/presentation/leftnavigation/opinion/op-ed/obama%E2%80%99s-india-nuke-legacy.aspx With nuclear deal my only concern is that through this India is effectively siging a CTBT in a hidden way, which means we won't be able to test again anytime in future and that's exactly whwat Obama advocated.
Lurker Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Abbe McCain se door raho bhai tum log. McCain is one of the 2 Senators from AZ. Pretty much has been so for the better for last 2 decades(or more). The man has done absolutely nothing for the state, or Phoenix, the city where he mostly resides. In fact it is widely known that McCain has been busy since 1996 to get elected to the White House and hence doesnt pay any attention to Senatorship. My Project Manager always keeps saying - McCain has the best job in the world, he gets paid for preparing for his next job when he sucks at his present one. All of the points that McCain says he would change, he has NOT found one of them to get to implement in his home state: 1) Immigration(AZ has possibly the worst Immigration issues thanks to a large border with Mexico). 2) Enviroment( Has not done one darn thing in this desert town where forest is extremely limited and whatever are there have been cut down for new Apartments etc) 3) Energy Crisis( For all the talks about Alternate Fuel no development has been made in AZ, a state with little population and excellent means of tapping alternate energy like Solar) etc etc. Thinking McCain is gonna do good for USA when he has done nothing for AZ, is similar to many Indians thinking Laloo would do good for India when he completely sucked in Bihar.
Guest dada_rocks Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Abbe McCain se door raho bhai tum log. McCain is one of the 2 Senators from AZ. Pretty much has been so for the better for last 2 decades(or more). The man has done absolutely nothing for the state, or Phoenix, the city where he mostly resides. In fact it is widely known that McCain has been busy since 1996 to get elected to the White House and hence doesnt pay any attention to Senatorship. My Project Manager always keeps saying - McCain has the best job in the world, he gets paid for preparing for his next job when he sucks at his present one. All of the points that McCain says he would change, he has NOT found one of them to get to implement in his home state: 1) Immigration(AZ has possibly the worst Immigration issues thanks to a large border with Mexico). 2) Enviroment( Has not done one darn thing in this desert town where forest is extremely limited and whatever are there have been cut down for new Apartments etc) 3) Energy Crisis( For all the talks about Alternate Fuel no development has been made in AZ, a state with little population and excellent means of tapping alternate energy like Solar) etc etc. Thinking McCain is gonna do good for USA when he has done nothing for AZ, is similar to many Indians thinking Laloo would do good for India when he completely sucked in Bihar. Once u enter white house u have no choice but to take decision one way or another can't dilly dally issues like u do as a senator. There is support system in place so his personal ability won't matter much all that matters is his stand on big issues. In my case that issue concerns india and whichever way I look at it McCain comes of better.. Laloo's example was quite pertinent. See why laloo doesnt indulge in his nautanki in delhi simple because he doesn;t have luxury of screwing up things here and yet considered messiha. At the very least he had to listen and say as the advisors ( meaning bureucrats) tell. All the song and dance of I changed this or that in railway aside but the fact is railway has been running on very sound principle since last 10 years and every year situation has been changing for better .. Lucky for laloo when he entered the continuous improvement took things beyond break-even.. Laloo intitally attempted his bihar-like drama of earthen pot/ khadi-stuff/trains for vegetables but pretty soon found nautanki doesn't work in delhi and allowed those who know how to run the show leeway..
sandtest Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Well, reading all these, I would say, McCain should pick up Condi Rice as his Vice Presidential Candidate. This may effectively neautralize the "Black" sympathy for Obama to some extent. Also, Condi Rice looks now like a mature diplomat with full experience, recently I read her views about India and Indian nuclear deal, they were very refreshing and it seems that she has really deep understanding of foreign policy as a career diplomat. Another thing which strikes is, the extent of "Race" politics existing in Amreeka, it has forced me to compare it with my own India. Politics of Amreeka bahadur = Race Politics. Indian siyasat = caste politics+ Muslim apeasement.
NeoCon Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Come on dude no idiot goes that far starting from zero.. do u possess traitor-meter:--D All Liberals are traitors and idiots, which explains how he got that far in the first place. I will admit, McCain isn't perfect. Anything short of a true Neoconservative will never be a truly great president. However, McCain is all there is now and I must fully support him over that piece of crap Obama.
Lurker Posted June 19, 2008 Posted June 19, 2008 Once u enter white house u have no choice but to take decision one way or another can't dilly dally issues like u do as a senator. There is support system in place so his personal ability won't matter much all that matters is his stand on big issues. In my case that issue concerns india and whichever way I look at it McCain comes of better.. That is wishful thinking isnt it? The way to judge a guy best is by his track record surely. If you pick someone in Indian cricket team you expect him to be good at domestic level first and foremost. I dont quite see how a player who fails at domestic level will do good at International level. McCain has not done anything of note for AZ and I am quite surprised to see how little Arizonians are excited that McCain might have a shot at Presidentship. Compare this with Illinois where people are strongly behind Obama. I personally know of how Arkansan felt about the two Clintons. Laloo intitally attempted his bihar-like drama of earthen pot/ khadi-stuff/trains for vegetables but pretty soon found nautanki doesn't work in delhi and allowed those who know how to run the show leeway.. See that is where I have no sympathy for the man. Why should a leader be allowed to screw up his state(in case of Laloo it is over 2 decades) and then he goes to Center people forget it?? Will Gujratis be okay if Modi practically scrwed the state for 20 years and then did good stuff at Center? of course not. The best way to judge a person is how he has performed in his past and McCain does not have much to write about really. Of course to make the matters worse he has basically given up on his Independent line of thinking and gone essentially George Bush's way.
Guest dada_rocks Posted June 20, 2008 Posted June 20, 2008 That is wishful thinking isnt it? The way to judge a guy best is by his track record surely. If you pick someone in Indian cricket team you expect him to be good at domestic level first and foremost. I dont quite see how a player who fails at domestic level will do good at International level. McCain has not done anything of note for AZ and I am quite surprised to see how little Arizonians are excited that McCain might have a shot at Presidentship. Compare this with Illinois where people are strongly behind Obama. I personally know of how Arkansan felt about the two Clintons. See that is where I have no sympathy for the man. Why should a leader be allowed to screw up his state(in case of Laloo it is over 2 decades) and then he goes to Center people forget it?? Will Gujratis be okay if Modi practically scrwed the state for 20 years and then did good stuff at Center? of course not. The best way to judge a person is how he has performed in his past and McCain does not have much to write about really. Of course to make the matters worse he has basically given up on his Independent line of thinking and gone essentially George Bush's way. No greenhorn will be selected for anything in that case.. take it from me Mccin will win arizona hands down just see laloo's example.. u can't hide when u enter the top office.. ennu indifference etc is no longer an option..nothign wishful that's how the game works.. about issues just go through the list of oabam's howlers.. it's politics everyone does about turn.. they are trying to win election and all the soundbites come with that in mind how many of those will be taken seriously once they come in power is anyone's guess... heck if election time barbs wud have been the pointer to how presidents behave then therw wud not be health insurance problem because promises to this effects have bene coming in each and every elction since god knows when.
Lurker Posted June 20, 2008 Posted June 20, 2008 No greenhorn will be selected for anything in that case.. There is no room for a Greenhorn, as you put it, in the White House. To become the President of USA you have to have a pedigree of sorts - Governor, Senator or in the least Congressman. In fact this is one of the key argument for McCain that he has loads of "experience". So when you think of him as a Greenhorn who will do better in White House you are actually torpedoing his own argument. And I would like to know of occassions when a Greenhorn has become President of US(or PM for India for that matter). To lead the country you have to have some sort of record, no matter how small it is. take it from me Mccin will win arizona hands down Not really. The Governor of Arizona, Janet Napolitano, is a big Obama supporter and one of the first leaders who supported Obama(much before Gore, Edwards, Richardson etc). And even though Hillary did prevail in AZ(thanks to Hispanic votes) I dont quite see a hands down victory for McCain. He might win in the end simply because AZ is a conservative state with lots of Catholics and Mormons both of whom are Republican vote blocks. If Obama does win the Presidentship(which looks likely) keep an eye open for Janet Napolitano. She might get a key department, there are hints she may get Secretary of State or Department of Justice.
Recommended Posts